INDUL SHAH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 25th April, 2001 convicting the appellant finding him guilty under Sec. 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act, 1985) and order on sentence dated 28th April, 2001 vide which the sentence was passed against the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 20 of the NDPS Act, in default of payment of fine, convict was ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) The facts in brief are that a secret information was received on the basis of which the police on 23rd Sept., 1999 at about 06.45 p.m., apprehended two persons namely Indul Shah (appellant herein) and Munna, from Chatta Rail chowk, Delhi. Notice under Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act, 1985 was served to which the accused persons refused to exercise the said option and their refusal was recorded to writing. Thereafter, on the direction of Additional SHO, who also reached the spot after receiving a wireless message, search of the accused Indul Shah was effected and one polythene packet of light green colour was recovered from the right hand pocket of the pant of the accused, which when opened was found to contain charas in the shape of sticks to the tune of 950 grams. Out of 950 gram charas recovered, 100 gram was separated as sample which was kept in white paper and the remaining charas was kept in the light green colour polythene and kept in two separate parcels. Thereafter, search of the accused Munna was effected by the same ASI but no incriminating article was found from his possession. It appears from the record that the case property was seized vide seizure memo Exh.PW 5/D; CFSL form was filled in and sealed; tehrir was prepared Ex.PW 11/A; FIR No.581/99 was registered; case property was handed over to the SHO; accused was arrested; the sample was got chemically analysed and after completion of the investigation, accused was sent for trial to the court. It further emerges from the record that charge under Sec. 20 of the NDPS Act was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) The prosecution had examined as many as eleven prosecution witnesses namely PW 1 Kamlesh Miglani; PW 2 Const. Satish Kumar; PW 3 HC Babu Lal; PW 4 HC Purshotam; PW 5 HC Dalbir Singh; PW 6 Const. Satbir Singh; PW 7 HC Prem Kumar; PW 8 Const. Kavinder; PW 9 Const. Yashbir; PW 10 SI Sanjay Sharma and PW 11 ASI Satpal. The statement of the accused Indul Shah was recorded under Sec. 313 of the Cr.P.C.